On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 11:59 AM Jane Chu <jane.chu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 11/9/2021 10:48 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 11:27 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 07:16:38PM -0600, Jane Chu wrote:
> >>> static size_t pmem_copy_from_iter(struct dax_device *dax_dev, pgoff_t pgoff,
> >>> void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i, int mode)
> >>> {
> >>> + phys_addr_t pmem_off;
> >>> + size_t len, lead_off;
> >>> + struct pmem_device *pmem = dax_get_private(dax_dev);
> >>> + struct device *dev = pmem->bb.dev;
> >>> +
> >>> + if (unlikely(mode == DAX_OP_RECOVERY)) {
> >>> + lead_off = (unsigned long)addr & ~PAGE_MASK;
> >>> + len = PFN_PHYS(PFN_UP(lead_off + bytes));
> >>> + if (is_bad_pmem(&pmem->bb, PFN_PHYS(pgoff) / 512, len)) {
> >>> + if (lead_off || !(PAGE_ALIGNED(bytes))) {
> >>> + dev_warn(dev, "Found poison, but addr(%p) and/or bytes(%#lx) not page aligned\n",
> >>> + addr, bytes);
> >>> + return (size_t) -EIO;
> >>> + }
> >>> + pmem_off = PFN_PHYS(pgoff) + pmem->data_offset;
> >>> + if (pmem_clear_poison(pmem, pmem_off, bytes) !=
> >>> + BLK_STS_OK)
> >>> + return (size_t) -EIO;
> >>> + }
> >>> + }
> >>
> >> This is in the wrong spot. As seen in my WIP series individual drivers
> >> really should not hook into copying to and from the iter, because it
> >> really is just one way to write to a nvdimm. How would dm-writecache
> >> clear the errors with this scheme?
> >>
> >> So IMHO going back to the separate recovery method as in your previous
> >> patch really is the way to go. If/when the 64-bit store happens we
> >> need to figure out a good way to clear the bad block list for that.
> >
> > I think we just make error management a first class citizen of a
> > dax-device and stop abstracting it behind a driver callback. That way
> > the driver that registers the dax-device can optionally register error
> > management as well. Then fsdax path can do:
> >
> > rc = dax_direct_access(..., &kaddr, ...);
> > if (unlikely(rc)) {
> > kaddr = dax_mk_recovery(kaddr);
>
> Sorry, what does dax_mk_recovery(kaddr) do?
I was thinking this just does the hackery to set a flag bit in the
pointer, something like:
return (void *) ((unsigned long) kaddr | DAX_RECOVERY)
>
> > dax_direct_access(..., &kaddr, ...);
> > return dax_recovery_{read,write}(..., kaddr, ...);
> > }
> > return copy_{mc_to_iter,from_iter_flushcache}(...);
> >
> > Where, the recovery version of dax_direct_access() has the opportunity
> > to change the page permissions / use an alias mapping for the access,
>
> again, sorry, what 'page permissions'? memory_failure_dev_pagemap()
> changes the poisoned page mem_type from 'rw' to 'uc-' (should be NP?),
> do you mean to reverse the change?
Right, the result of the conversation with Boris is that
memory_failure() should mark the page as NP in call cases, so
dax_direct_access() needs to create a UC mapping and
dax_recover_{read,write}() would sink that operation and either return
the page to NP after the access completes, or convert it to WB if the
operation cleared the error.
> > dax_recovery_read() allows reading the good cachelines out of a
> > poisoned page, and dax_recovery_write() coordinates error list
> > management and returning a poison page to full write-back caching
> > operation when no more poisoned cacheline are detected in the page.
> >
>
> How about to introduce 3 dax_recover_ APIs:
> dax_recover_direct_access(): similar to dax_direct_access except
> it ignores error list and return the kaddr, and hence is also
> optional, exported by device driver that has the ability to
> detect error;
> dax_recovery_read(): optional, supported by pmem driver only,
> reads as much data as possible up to the poisoned page;
It wouldn't be a property of the pmem driver, I expect it would be a
flag on the dax device whether to attempt recovery or not. I.e. get
away from this being a pmem callback and make this a native capability
of a dax device.
> dax_recovery_write(): optional, supported by pmem driver only,
> first clear-poison, then write.
>
> Should we worry about the dm targets?
The dm targets after Christoph's conversion should be able to do all
the translation at direct access time and then dax_recovery_X can be
done on the resulting already translated kaddr.
> Both dax_recovery_read/write() are hooked up to dax_iomap_iter().
Yes.
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
